An Analysis of Psychology in Art Essay

Kahlo’s painting Self Portrait with Cropped Hair (1940) and Lichtenstein’s Drowning Girl (1963) both utilize emotive methods so as to pass on progressively unobtrusive sentiments. While Lichtenstein utilized an increasingly strong look to his female subject, Kahlo utilizes a proper position in her self-representation, yet both give the watcher distress being the middle subject behind these female figures. Kahlo’s self representation shows a lady on a seat (probably Kahlo) with the trim bits of her hair dissipated about her. This utilization of the hair being all around the primary figure gives the watcher the impression of a fight †that Kahlo lost. Hair is a representation in the artistic creation †a similitude of harmony or quality. In the book of scriptures the image of hair can be found in the account of Samson and Delilah in which Samson got his quality from his hair, and the whore Delilah trim everything off in this way rendering the legend pointless. Assuming at that point, Kahlo’s hair is her quality it is nearly as if the watcher is peering on to a capital punishment of the lady. Capital punishment in Lichtenstein’s work is substantially more barefaced as the suffocating young lady states in her air pocket â€Å"I’d preferably sink over call Brad for help† which organizes this subject of urgency and distress. The position of either female in their regarded portrayals are inverse: Lichtenstein gives his subject a curbed and miserable position being now as a rule lowered in the water and in this manner closer to death while in Kahlo’s painting, albeit almost every last bit of her hair is spread about her in a type of destruction, the figure remains in erect position rather in a position of having lost the fight. There is particularly more profundity present in Kahlo’s painting, with the trim hair dissipated on the ground and the points of the seat making the watcher fell as if they are peering into this occasion. In Lichtenstein’s work the watcher is surrendered an end of the lady who doesn’t take into consideration much profundity to be seen †however in exemplary Lichtenstein strategy, his utilization of level planes further build up this loss of field of profundity. This is maybe an allegorical feeling of profundity since Kahlo’s representation is unobtrusive and the watcher needs to add something extra to the subject and the subtler feelings associated with the work while in Lichtenstein’s work the watcher simply needs to peruse what the young lady says so as to comprehend everything about the artistic creation in one look. With a second look at the figure in Kahlo’s work (and with the historical backdrop of her ongoing separation from her unfaithful spouse Diego Rivera) the watcher may figure that this trimming of the hair is emblematic of Kahlo’s condition of feelings. Maybe she is shedding the piece of herself that Diego had guaranteed as Kahlo has said of her craft, â€Å"I don't have a clue whether my artistic creations are Surrealist or not, however I do realize that they are simply the most candid articulation. † (Kahlo). Subsequently, in trimming of her hair (probably he cherished long haired ladies) she is making a case of self character away from her deceiving spouse and in this manner the composition gets changed into a lady losing hair, into a lady picking up her personality. The highest point of Kahlo’s painting even states as much in saying, â€Å"†Look, in the event that I cherished you it was a direct result of your hair. Since you are without hair, I don’t love you any longer. â€Å"† Lichtenstein’s representation of a lady who is additionally in the terrible finish of adoration likewise has a little piece of this personality. She expresses that she would prefer to kick the bucket than have Brad come and help her, yet the watcher ponders, why doesn’t the lady attempt and spare herself? The profundity that is inadequate in the field of vision with Lichtenstein’s work is supplanted by a profundity into character of the lady. An analyst may contend that the lady has an Ophelia complex (from Hamlet) in which she would prefer to bite the dust than live without her darling. In either occurrence, obviously the two craftsmen are attempting to delineate an enthusiastic state wherein love is the reason for the impacts. Lichtenstein’s work is predominately developed through DC funnies (a board of which motivated The Drowning Girl). His utilization of Benday spots underscore an elaborate methodology. Kahlo’s workmanship is progressively dreamlike in nature and representative in style as is clear in Self Portrait with Cropped Hair. In dreamlike style, Kahlo permits the exchange of sexual orientation to assume an overwhelm job in the work of art. The figure, Kahlo herself, is wearing men’s slacks and a shirt, hence permitting the short hair to nearly characterize her in a manly limit. In Lichtenstein’s work the sexual orientation of the artistic creation is very clear with the lady demonstrating qualities a powerless lady suffocating in the water just as in affection. This lady gives up her command over her destiny in a fairly meek part of womanliness (the watcher is helped to remember the huge bosomed females with sickening dread motion pictures who run from the beast in exceptional advances just to fall in their high heels and be wrecked by their follower). In Kahlo’s painting, maybe on account of this sex bowing thought, the lady becomes like a man, that is, ready to endure, or, in correlation, she turns into the follower and in this way solid. Contrary to the book of scriptures story at that point, Kahlo doesn't in actuality become feeble in losing her hair, but instead the work of art is intended to propose that she gets solid in this shedding of hair, and spouse. In either painting unmistakably the two specialists are keen on the brain research of their subject. In the DC comic world by which Lichtenstein picked up motivation, ladies were to some degree vulnerable animals in the 1960’s just increasing a ladylike position in the 1980’s or thereabouts. His vision of ladies through his representation gives the watcher that without adoration, a lady doesn't have a personality, and in this way, demise is a coherent substitute to not having a ‘Brad’. In Kahlo’s painting the equivalent might be deciphered; she permits her womanliness to encompass her on the ground as her hair, and her change into a man makes her more grounded. It is then intriguing to take note of the decades which lie between either painting †it might be said that Kahlo was dynamic with her painting style and her portrayal of ladies (maybe observing Kate Chopin’s The Awakening where the hero can't live in a man’s world and in this way suffocates herself in a demonstration of opportunity). Plainly in the two fine arts there are forceful feelings which move the subjects into the spots they remain before the watcher. The passionate excursion has reached a conclusion in either painting or the female figures either guarantee their personalities (on account of Kahlo) or they become lowered in our current reality where they can't live without adoration (on account of Lichtenstein). The brain science of the primary characters gets clear through the artists’ rendering using space, content, and imagery. Works Cited Alloway, Lawrence, Roy Lichtenstein, N. Y. : Abbeville, 1983 759. 1 L701A Claudia Bauer, Frida Kahlo, Munich: Prestel Verlag, 2005. Frida Kahlo, ed. Elizabeth Carpenter, exh. feline. , Minneapolis: Walker Art Center, 2007 759. 972 K12FR Gannit Ankori, Imagining Her Selves: Frida Kahlo’s Poetics of Identity and Fragmentation, Westport, Conn. : Greenwood Press, 2002. Hayden Herrer, Frida Kahlo: The Paintings, N. Y. : Harper Collins, 1991. 759. 072 K12H Lobel, Michael, Image Duplicator: Roy Lichtenstein and the Emergence of Pop Art, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002. Pop Art: A Critical History, Steven H. Madoff, ed. , Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1997 709. 73 P8242 Waldmann, Diane, Roy Lichtenstein, exh. feline.. , N. Y. : Guggenheim Museum, 1993. 759. 1 L701WAL Whiting, Cecile, A Taste for Pop: Pop Art, Gender and Consumer Culture, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.